Opinions on the expression of chauvinism, racism, homophobia, etc.
haku: This forum sets limits to the expression of certain opinions like chauvinism, racism, homophobia, etc. This thread is an outlet to express opinions about those limits and where the line is drawn between what's acceptable and what's not.
For information, a similar discussion happened three years ago, except that this time many people were asking for stricter limitations to the expression of homophobia and racism. QueenBee: Continuation of this thread that got very off-topic after the closing of this thread. Quote:
[nonconfrontational tone] to you it is. to me its blatantly "discriminating" and personally insulting. would it be too much to ask if the thread be closed? [/off] Rachel: Satire of religion, politics etc is not the same thing as direct insults based on race/gender/orientation. |
first and foremost, what hate thread? i simply ridiculed male genitalia and sexual performance. nothing wrong with that. it's a personal opinion at the very least. secondly, i post no hate. this thread is obviously different. this is an analogy the symbolizes something that people think but do not say. sure, the undertones can be offensive, but it can't be SO offensive that people get upset over it. after all, its message is subtle, not overt, and this is its very nature. because the undertones of the message are cast through humor albeit not of the light variety, this is simply a comical and suggestive critique on religion. so, it is not the same thing as what i posted. i came right out and said, "cock is disgusting" and people get heated and upset. now, had i presented my message in a humorous "it's not only the size of the sausage, but what it's attached to that is disgusting" fashion, people would scoff at best and roll their eyes, rather than close the thread, call the thread uber feminist (despite not know that that really means) and that i hate men. if anything, it is one giant example of how and why i am not at all attracted to men, intimately or physically. that is not hate. it is what i am. ok, getting off topic here..in conclusion, these two threads are not the same because one is dripping in satire and the other is blunt. which means, if you speak your mind, the thread will be closed. and if you present your message with satirical overtones, people will get a kick out of it. :done:
|
which is why i would like to have this thread closed. people closed your thread [to which i took no offense] for unjust reasons. forre didnt like the opinions being expressed, which i respect, but why isnt she allowed to make her own opinion? but if thats how its got to be then fine. which is why i would like this thread to be closed. i find it DIRECTLY and personally insulting, satirical undertone or not. and every comment commending this thread is just another stab. do i have to have a million rep points to have my opinion and feelings count? or is it the little stars??
to be honest, i dont give a damn about this thread. like everyone else i can choose not to read it. my point is, if your going to keep this thread open then keep lux's open. if your going to keep lux's thread closed then this thread should be closed on the same grounds. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Ok, here it goes. Who is offended here directly because a person was born like that (like in Lux's thread), please RAISE YOUR HAND!
This is a satire. Try to see the difference, ok? P.S. I will not open Lux's thread, no matter what. The reason is simple - we need to draw a line somewhere, ok? |
so before it can be considered "descrimination" whatever is being descriminated against has to be innate? what?
i see the difference, but just because it has a damn punch line im NOT allowed to be offended?! i understand you have to draw a line..and i consider this to be over that line which is why id like this thread to be closed. |
Quote:
|
1.) I think the text in question was relatively neutral, not exposing any religion out there. Yeah, Rachel did compare it to christianity (which would granted be an obvious reference in this case), but no religion is mentioned in the text at all. It's more a satirical jab at dogmas in general, which could apply to almost all popular monotheistic religions (judaism and islam not excluded) out there and numerous politheistic ones. It doesn't discrimminate against anyone. It just shows a point of reference of an atheist.
2.) I'll go on the record here and say I wasn't really offended by Lux's thread, but rather annoyed because of it's sheer stupidity and somewhat obvious aim to provoke. We had another member doing the same shit even more blatantly so I'm sure you all get the gist of it. That wasn't a subtle satire of males, that was just bland i-think-men-suck-and-imma-show-you-why-by-raising-some-ridiculous-points-i-made-up-this-afternoon exercise. I'm not even saying a good satire about men and their deficiencies couldn't be made. It most definitely could. And it could be clever and witty. But that was just bad taste. How can one argue such dubious shit without feeling redundant for doing so? Think about it... try comming up with an argument against these two things a) God Exists. It is true because the Bible tells us so. and b) Semen is gross. Know what I mean? Offtop: I won't comment on the thread being closed, though. |
Religion or belief in general is something you as a person choose to believe in. Christians believe that everyone who aren't christians are wrong and will burn in eternal damnation. Heh, okay, maybe not directly, but you know what I mean :) Even so, that's okay ... non-believers don't take it personally. But when someone makes an example to question your belief in general - not an attack on you as person - you shouldn't take it personally either.
Now, race and sex are things you DON'T choose. It's something you always have to live with - if you like it or not. Most people like it. Hehe, some very rare examples change "their outside". To question these things as better or worse than anything else would be VERY wrong, and therefor a very different topic. Now, I believe in the equal rights for every single person on this earth, and respect for religion, sex, race and sexuality. But there's a huge difference between innocent satire and direct insults. Hey, people joke about sexuality and races all the time. You don't think about it, but it excists. It just isn't bad, and most important thing of all; people don't take it personally! I think people should be more openminded about humorous things and try not to care too much, but again raise a big voice against discrimination - like direct, stupid and meaningless insults just because of frustration, anger and hatred. Now, let me add that I'm one of those who actually thought that some of Lux's points was funny :) But I understand the desition that was made. A similar desition based on the same reasons on this thread would not be correct tho... |
I can see why madeldoe would find this offensive. It's basically equating the love of God to kissing some guy's ass and that believers don't follow the word of God for altruistic purposes but rather for their own selfish interests, among other things.
If this were something aimed to a particular group of people within Christianity [cough]AmericanChristianFundamentalists[/cough] then I don't think anybody would have a problem with it. However this is applied to every Christian, fundamentalist or not, which includes a moderate like madeldoe. And does it really matter if she chose Christianity or not? I mean, technically we kind of chose the country we're living in; even if we were born into it, we could always change. But if a thread opened up saying, oh I don't know, "Canada is the worst Goddamn country on face of Earth" or some shit (don't get any ideas!) I'd be offended. Deep down we are all just a tad bit nationalistic and to insult something somebody identifies with would be to insult the people him/herself. PS: You know I love you right Lux? I was kind of taken aback at what was said in your thread. I however, was waaaay too freaking offended by people who equated that to being feminist. In any case, because there are a number of males here Lux's thread got locked. If most of us considered Christianity as much as madeldoe then yeah this thread too would be locked up. I am well aware that it was a woman who locked up the thread, but I still think the statement holds true... to a degree. |
Quote:
Sorry if no-one understood what I said, my writing has lately been pretty bad. Also, I don't think anyone or very few were actually OFFENDED by what Lux wrote, but I think it was written in a dumb way. It wasn't witty, clever or funny at all, just.... stupid. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
The title of this thread indicates it is about Christianity and Rachel concluded with remarks (that is if it was her remark's at all) at the end to not believe in the Bible because it doesn't make sense. This is about Christianity. But for the sake of argument, let's just say it isn't. This thread would then be an attack on faith alone which implicates every religion and would therefore be moreso insulting.
I don't think it really matters whether the joke is comparing one religion with others. It's basically calling a particular one as bullshit and that's still offensive to some people. I never said Lux's post wasn't offensive. ETA: Quote:
This is pretty darn explicit, less so than Lux, but still nonetheless. Whether or not it is funny is a matter of taste but I think the message is pretty clear. I know that there are more females than there are male, but the fact that there are a significant amount of men browsing these forums does affect how the site is managed. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that madeldoe is the only open Christian is the entire English Forum, if the ratio of Christians to Athiests were that of Female to Male than it is pretty reasonable to assume that Lux's thread would still be open. Though for the past couple of years this site has been administered exceptionally well, I do find that this site has a history of leaving hateful posts unchecked because nobody of the group targeted were there to speak up. |
PowerPuff Grrl, so if the thread name was changed and the comment at the end was removed would it be different or not?
And btw, no I never wrote any of that, it was just a copy & paste. :rolleyes: |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
ETA: Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
:lol: :lol: :lol: I keed, I keed. I'm just trying to get people to see where madeldoe is coming from. In any case, that's the same reasoning Lux used. So I guess the closure of satirical threads can be determined by how funny and how well comprehensive they are rather than how offensive they may be to some. I'm no lawyer but uh, that's setting up bad precedence there. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Some racist things were uttered in the past but were never really dealt with because there were not enough Black people to speak up, though admittedly the site was really young and there were about two moderators. Still however, this behaviour has continued with some anti-Semitic posts uttered here and there and considering that ypsidan04 is the only overt Jew and only posts once in a while, anti-Semiticism was tolerated. Same with anti-Islamic statements and since rosh and xmad are the only Muslims here, with xmad not really giving a shit, that only makes one person and rosh's presence is ever disappearing. And now with Christianity and madeldoe. Now contrast that with homophobic and anti-male remarks stated and you'll see that there is a direct correlation between how posts perceived as hateful are dealt with and the demographic of posters. Not to say that any of you guys are anti-whatever, just that you'll speak up if something affects you particularly and most of you have the benefit of being backed-up by other people equally offended. Not that I'm saying it should be locked, but that we shouldn't be deciding what thread needs to be closed based on how many people are offended, or at least turned off, by it. If half of us, or even a quarter of us were as Christian as madeldoe would this thread would be closed too? I tend to think so. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
As far as I remember, there *were* some anti-jew statements on this forum, and they were dealt with. I don't understand what you mean (specifically).
Saying that nobody does anything to deal with such things as discrimination, only when enough people "care" or feel offended, is kind of like a slap in the face for a moderator, since they try to keep the forum as clean as possible, and free of such things (I too am a moderator but take no credit for keeping things in order as I haven't been moderating the General Forum for so long). |
Last couple of sentences from this post in the thread.
I took it as a satire but I guess Lux has the final say. The thread though didn't have to be closed down by males and I doubt any even had the chance to post in it seeing as how it was closed down real fast. Because there are a bunch of males it is more likely for people (male or female) to consider them than to consider, for example, the one lonely Kiwi so as to prevent a flame-war, a pre-emptive lock-down if you will. Because there aren't that many Kiwis, people wouldn't know what exactly offends a Kiwi so if something comes up that's anti-Kiwi nobody would recognize it as being offensive. We as Athiests may not recognize this joke as being anti-Christian because regarding this site we don't interact too much, if at all, with devout Christians. Even when we talk about Christianity or about religion, it is never in a positive light. PS: Queenbee, my posts aren't meant to be a harsh critiques of the moderation (to which I have stated earlier have been doing an excellent job in the past couple of years). I'm just saying that it is really hard to notice one person's objection to a post when it is drowned out by numerous others that do not object. Regradless of how super-PC any moderator is, it's impossible to regulate everything, I recognize that. Obviously madeldoe has yet to argue why this thread should be closed if she so wishes but that doesn't make it less wrong for an Athiest to say that a Christian should not be insulted by what is essentially an anti-Christian post. |
Still the basic point remains that Lux's thread wasn't locked because of it's offensive nature, but rather cause of it's stupidity (pardon the expression). Did she mean it as humorous? Well, it certainly didn't appear to be, despite that last few sentences, however she was already accused of feminism by then, which WOULD make her say that in her defence anyway. If it was meant in a humorous way, then let me tell you, it was a really kauffman-esque performance. :p
I guess we should give her the opportunity to make her intentions ragarding that clear. |
I think there are heaps of christians that would smile when reading this text 'cause they simply see the irony, yet don't take it personally. I don't believe that any christians would be convinced that their belief had been proven wrong, or that it was hurt in any way, just by reading this innocent text. I wouldn't in light years call this text an attack against christianity. This text was only a weak attempt to examplify the irony of it.
I know this guy in Australia, he's catholic and laughs of every anti-christian comment I come with. He thinks they're just funny, 'cause they are awfully cliché, as he has great knowledge of the black metal scene. He's a metalhead... why hasn't he said that my comments are insulting, and why does he keep listening to the music? Because he doesn't take it personally, and he don't believe that some atheist from norway with satanic overtones could convince him or even make him feel less of about his absolute belief here in this world, and his way of looking at reality, the truth and that people will go to a better place when they "cross over to the other side". It's something private and important for him, and he doesn't care about other people's remarks. I respect him ooo-so-much for that! :) Even Jerry Seinfeld brought up the issue of anti-semitism and how everyone spoke about anti-seimitism even from the slightest attempt of a jew-joke. I mean, everyone got offended by nothing. He examplified it by talking about anti-dentitism on one of the episodes of Seinfeld. Funny, and very self-ironic. It was pretty clear what he ment... and Jerry Seinfeld is a jew. I'm just saying that people shouldn't take things so personally. Just laugh and forget about it! :) |
Quote:
PS. what's wrong with a war of words...it's fun and it's all virtual anyway..I find this thread quite disappointing compared to the flame war we could have had. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I don't mind Lux thread, it was kinda fun..yeah well, thanks for all your good wishes... unfortunately I too don't have enough time to enjoy myself over here as I used to but yeah I do pop around for the ocassional dose of fun' n' games...you do realise however that the thread can be seen as offensive, don't you? It's common sense, don't have to believe in God to see that...well never mind, good luck with the translation venture :) |
i am really tired
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
on a side note. having debates such at these are tedious because english is not the best language for some members on the forum. that is, it is simply difficult to understand what people write. grammar is important. as is being able to accurately convey what you think. in cases where it is difficult for people to express their opinions, ideas get blurry and the debate itself goes to hell. english is not my first language but i know it better than any other language. i think i have mastered the english language to a degree sufficiently enough to express my views clearly and accurately. definition of feminism: men and women should be equal in every realm: public and private. that is, men and women should be equal both in the professional world and the domestic world. example: women should not be left at home to take care of the kids and clean the house, and they should not make $0.75 to the $1.00 for the same work that men do. in one word, equality between men and women. |
Quote:
( ie the "arguments" did make some sense, and nobody would get offended by the way the arguments were put forward ). How exactly was your thread promoting the "equality between men and women" :rolleyes: |
it is not and i never said it was. since there was not a clear definition present on this forum, i decided it best to establish what it means. please re-read the thread. i never said it was feminist. it is clearly, not. however, others did.
|
Seems that some people have lost the sense of humour completely. What's wrong with questioning our thoughts and ideas whether it be about religion or sexuality or whatever else?
Unfortunately I missed Lux' thread, it was open less than 3 hours and was closed before one single argument. Freddy, I don't know why you don't have trust in the imagination of members of this forum, that you can state that it is stupid, before a discussion has even begun. For me Lux' statements were funny and worth of some witty argumentation, and I never had the impression that she has a tendency to hatred and personal offensiveness. So I think you (the mods) missed a chance for an interesting thread about sexual self-judging. There is a difference between personal attacks and general 'pointed' discussions about some hot topics. Why not have some courage to permit such controverse threads? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Why can't the mods find it wrong to post such a thread? Do we need others to speak aswell? Maybe not so many spoke against the thread (except moderators and maybe one or two "normal" member, as you call them) but someone did, and a moderator chose to close the thread - don't expect it to open again. It goes to the trash. I didn't say anyone was offended. I also stated that I wasn't offended. |
Quote:
Sorry if I offend you, but I am not used to be dictated about what I am allowed to speak. I thought these times are over now in Europe, but it's not to late for me to learn that it's not! |
Quote:
I don't think it was locked so that opinions shouldn't be expressed... more because it was very straight forward men-suck-talking. I think there are clever ways to write such things, for example this thread. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Do you ? I can hook up you with a couple of links . No need to thank you me. So , our mods didn't like that and closed the thread . What do you want to do ? Walk around the forum with the banners :* Please open Flapping Balls thread . We haven't got full pleasure yet !!!* |
Quote:
I know too the state of mind that some hard ultra-feminists could have and the hate they could feel to wards men.. Don't tell me it doesn't exist. So I wasn't stuck to the dictionary ; I was referring to this state of mind. Sorry to tell you that...you can tell you love men and you have nothing against them but I really wonder how you could write such disgusting things if you feel the such respect you pretend to have to wards men. Quote:
I have replied and expressed my full disgust, dislike in reading a such post. For your information, I'm a normal member as you and I have absolutely no more "right", no more power than you: direct or "indirect". The first time I read your posts Argos, you were insulting all the mods for a reason where you weren't involved at all.... I see you haven't changed as you still contest about the honesty, the fair judgment of the mods about a thread you haven't read.... Zorro 's complex ? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.